I love the photo and its post-processing, whether or not someone out there would claim it’s a cliche subject matter or not just because it’s a cemetery. Some armchair critics act like almost everything in the world is a cliche to be avoided simply because the odds are someone else in the world has also taken a similar photo themselves at some point in the past.
As you allude to here, and as I’ve always held, I believe most of what makes a photo an interesting one are the visual geometries and lines that would otherwise go unnoticed if not for somewhat atypical composition styles, and the way camera lenses see things as opposed to the way the human eye itself sees things.
I love the photo and its post-processing, whether or not someone out there would claim it’s a cliche subject matter or not just because it’s a cemetery. Some armchair critics act like almost everything in the world is a cliche to be avoided simply because the odds are someone else in the world has also taken a similar photo themselves at some point in the past.
As you allude to here, and as I’ve always held, I believe most of what makes a photo an interesting one are the visual geometries and lines that would otherwise go unnoticed if not for somewhat atypical composition styles, and the way camera lenses see things as opposed to the way the human eye itself sees things.
Eric, thanks for the insightful comment. Nice to hear from someone such as yourself who is so active in the Kansas City photography community.